This article is from Journal of Conservative Dentistry : JCD, volume 16.

Abstract

Background:: Among the advice on prevent cross-infection was included usage of mechanical barriers on tips of photoactivation units. However, questions about the use of protective barriers placed on the light-curing unit's tips and the possibility of interference with the ability of guaranteeing an effective polymerization of composite resins need to be clarified. Aims:: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of cross infection control barriers used on the light-curing device tips on the cure depth of composite resin. Materials and Methods:: Power density measurements from the light-cure unit were recorded with a radiometer on ten separate occasions with different types and placement modes of each barrier (low-density polyethylene and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) film – smooth and folds) and no-barrier (control). Cure depth of TPH™ Spectrum™ resin, A2-A4, was evaluated by the scraping test. Statistical Analysis:: The data were analyzed using Student's t-test or ANOVA one-way with Tukey's test (α =0.05). Results:: Same type of barrier and different shades (A2, A4) of composite exhibited significant difference in the cure depth among all groups (P < 0.05). Both low-density polyethylene and PVC film folded barriers produced a significant reduction in the light intensity (P < 0.05). Conclusions:: Regarding the resin shade, there was a significant reduction in the cure depth of A4 composite resin (dark shade) but this reduction is not enough to cause any adverse effect on the material's clinical performance. Therefore, disposable barriers can be recommended for use over the end of the light guide.

plus-circle Add Review

comment

Reviews